Foes Fear Federal Education Control

CREST HAVEN – A petition bearing 300 names in opposition to Common Core State Standards, whose stated goal by the state Department of Education is “to ensure that all children, regardless of life circumstances, graduate from high school ready for college and career” was presented to freeholders June 11.
Jan Lenox of North Wildwood, presented the petition, and asked the board to sign it. Michelle Mellon of Green Creek spoke against the Common Core State Standards, which the state Board of Education and state Department of Education adopted in June 2010.
Common Core State Standards Initiative “Preparing America’s students for college and career.”
45 states and the D.C., four territories and the Dept of Defense Education Activity have adopted the Common Core Standards. (New Jersey is listed as having already adopted)
Lenox told the board she represented citizens from South Jersey who, like herself, believes the entire program needs to be scrapped in favor of local school boards mandating what it taught in their districts.
Lenox, Mellon and others met with Sen. Jeff Van Drew (D-1st) for over an hour. She said they presented him with copies of their petition, and explained that they were not willing to support the “Race to the Top” with mandates which, she believes, are wrong.
Among those, Lenox said, are having students fill out many forms containing data about their homes and families, which ought to be personal, she believes.
“He (Van Drew) was frank. He said to get a bill passed, he needed support from an official body. That’s you guys,” Lenox said.
She handed the board a resolution which it drafted, stating opposition to Common Core standards. Director Gerald Thornton, while stating he was sympathetic to her cause, said any resolution passed by the board would have to be drafted by County Counsel Barbara Bakley-Marino.
Thornton said the board would likely pass the revised resolution at its June 25 meeting.
Mellon told the board some educators are refusing to “sign off” on the program since they believe it will “dumb down” students instead of making them more competitive.
“People who have developed the program have nice, official sounding names, and have accepted millions of dollars to promote it from companies who stand to make money from it,” she said.
Among the glitches, she foresees, is that districts will have to “spend millions for iPads but the tests have to be hand scored. It makes no sense. They will have to hire staff to hand score tests multiple times a year. Teacher evaluations will be based on how the children score,” Mellon added.
If teachers do not teacher to the core curriculum for two years, their children will not pass standardized tests. They are forced to teach to the standards,” she said.
The new core standards will impact home schoolers as well, Mellon added.
That is because, to score well on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) for college, they must know questions from the Common Core standard system.
“Home schoolers will have to abide as well as private schools,” she added.
Mellon said her research into the program “uncovered a lot more,” some of which was contained in the proposed resolution.
Freeholder E. Marie Hayes, who oversees education, said that, since the opponents first addressed the board earlier in the year, she had met with county School Supt. Richard Stepura.
“I certainly put forth your concerns,” she said. Stepura is the local representative of the state Department of Education. “He is taking it from there. He spoke to many in the state and knows there are concerns about the curriculum,” Hayes said.
“That is the only thing we can do at this point, since we are awaiting his report. He is addressing your concerns,” Hayes added.
Mellon wondered if the board would pass along the resolution to similar bodies in the state to help build opposition.
“I really agree with where you are going,” Thornton replied. “I think states’ rights are being violated here. Historically, states and local school boards have always been in control of the curriculum in all the schools. Suddenly, here is the federal government coming in.”
“Data collection bothers me a great deal,” Thornton continued, “More so now in the last week of 10 days, seeing what they are doing to all of us collecting masses of data on all of us. It’s frightening about privacy rights,” Thornton said.
“I don’t think it’s proper students filling out forms without the parents’ knowledge. I would not want my children or grandchildren doing that. This is far reaching, really far reaching in the impact it will have. I don’t think it would stand up if challenged. I don’t think it will prevail,” Thornton said.
“I will defer to (Counsel), she will advise us. It’s got to be a real challenge for her,” Thornton continued. “The issue really lies with the superintendent of school in each district and the school board and state Commissioner of Education, and the Legislature,” he continued.
Thornton wonders why Van Drew said he would need local support before moving in opposition to the program.
“There is no reason that a bill cannot be introduced without the support of this board,” he added.
Mellon told the board she was among those who traveled to Trenton June 3 to speak in opposition of the program before the state Department of Education. She said the small room was filled with opponents, none spoke in favor of the program.
Thornton wondered, too, why the teachers unions, including New Jersey Education Association, one of the most powerful and vocal groups of public employees had not been more vocal in opposing the program.
“I can’t imagine why members aren’t jumping on this,” Thornton said.
When Thornton asked if part of the issue of adopting the program involved federal funding, Lenox replied, “It’s all about the money.”
Those who refuse to adopt the program, said Mellon, would lose funding.
“I think the board agrees with your position,” said Thornton. “We will take the resolution and send it to the legislators, governor’s office and the Commissioner of Education,” he concluded.